Jon Stewart vs. Tucker Carlson: The rematch.

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Stewart-Carlson II: Anatomy of a Showdown

Jon Stewart vs. Tucker Carlson: The rematch.

Beginning Aug. 8 at 11 p.m., MSNBC's "The Situation With Tucker Carlson" will go mano a mano with Comedy Central's "The Daily Show," hosted by Stewart, who last fall called Carlson a rude term for a portion of the male anatomy.

Their on-air spat began when Stewart took advantage of an appearance on CNN's now-disbanded "Crossfire" to scold Carlson and co-host Paul Begala.

"You're doing theater, when you should be doing debate. . . . What you do is not honest. What you do is partisan hackery," Stewart lectured.

When Carlson told Stewart, "I do think you're more fun on your show," Stewart responded: "You know what's interesting, though? You're as big a [bleep] on your show as you are on any show."

MSNBC will put former Fox News Channel anchor Rita Cosby's new show in the 9 p.m. time slot previously held by Carlson. "Rita Cosby: Live and Direct" is described in an MSNBC news release as "a hard-hitting, no-nonsense news program that brings viewers stories they won't see anywhere else."

In its short run on MSNBC, "The Situation" has averaged just 200,000 viewers, which is down more than 40 percent from what Deborah Norville's show averaged last year, and far short of the 1.4 million that Jon Stewart has averaged per show so far this year. "The Situation" will be the only live cable news program at 11 p.m., competing with repeats of Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor" and CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight," as well as Stewart's show.

-- John Maynard

I believe MSNBC is unavailable on Rogers/Shaw Cable, but then, I wouldn’t notice.

Guess that I'll have to wait it out until the first blogger posts a link at 11:30:01 PM

For any who missed, or wish to re-experience the original fracas, here is the link to Stewart-Carlson I

 

[Guest]

My money's on Stewart.

 

[shereads]

I want to host a dinner party for Jon, and Bill Mahr and Garrison Keillor and Bill Clinton, and Al Franken if he'll agree not to mention his nemisis. Oh, and Letterman. Wanna come?

Good. I don't cook.

I believe MSNBC is unavailable on Rogers/Shaw Cable, but then, I wouldn’t notice.

Guess that I'll have to wait it out until the first blogger posts a link at 11:30:01 PM

For any who missed, or wish to re-experience the original fracas, here is the link to Stewart-Carlson I

 

[shereads]

God bless you for posting that link.

He's my new hero.


I love it when Carlson defends his show's pandering non-debates by suggesting that Jon's show on Comedy Central fails to ask hard questions when politicians are on.

Stewart: "The show that leads into mine is puppets making crank phone calls. You guys are on CNN."

 

[rikaaim]

That was the first I've heard of that show and episode. It was also the first time I've seen it. Thank you very much. I have a new found respect for Jon Stewart that goes far beyond his comedic talents.

 

[Liar]

I'd lost that clip. Thanks for the link and the read VB.

Stewart 4 prez.

 

[Guest]

That was the first I've heard of that show and episode. It was also the first time I've seen it. Thank you very much. I have a new found respect for Jon Stewart that goes far beyond his comedic talents.

You should read his book - America (The Book) A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction

He designed it in the fashion of a textbook and it does contain excellent historical information. Presented in a Stewart kind of slant.

And it also contains many, many laughs.

AND, since it was banned by Walmart because of the naked pictures of the Supreme Court Justices, even better!




(Edited to add - simulated naked pictures - simulated! You have to match up the Justices with their robes.)

 

[rikaaim]

You should read his book - America (The Book) A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction

He designed it in the fashion of a textbook and it does contain excellent historical information. Presented in a Stewart kind of slant.

And it also contains many, many laughs.

AND, since it was banned by Walmart because of the naked pictures of the Supreme Court Justices, even better!

Since I buy anything automatically that is banned by Walmart, and appears on Comedy Central, it's done. Already. Seriously. It just showed up at my door by UPS. Excuse me, I have to go sign for it now. I hope the delivery person likes a young, naked male signing for his...*cough*...package.

 

[Guest]

Since I buy anything automatically that is banned by Walmart, and appears on Comedy Central, it's done. Already. Seriously. It just showed up at my door by UPS. Excuse me, I have to go sign for it now. I hope the delivery person likes a young, naked male signing for his...*cough*...package.

I wouldn't mind a young, naked male signing for anything I delivered.

 

[rikaaim]

I wouldn't mind a young, naked male signing for anything I delivered.

I still haven't gotten dressed. Let's see...what else could I order...

The entire first season of The Dave Chapelle Show. Now, you just have to get it here.


Naw, forget that. I need a new flogger. Tell ya what, pick me out a good one, deliver it, and I'm sure we can arrange a payment upon arrival.

 

[Guest]

I still haven't gotten dressed. Let's see...what else could I order...

The entire first season of The Dave Chapelle Show. Now, you just have to get it here.


Naw, forget that. I need a new flogger. Tell ya what, pick me out a good one, deliver it, and I'm sure we can arrange a payment upon arrival.

 

[Pure]

rematch

reading the exchange posted, i don't think carlson was bested.

it's hard to pin down a comedian, esp. when it's unclear if s/he's generally poking fun at politicians as pretentious and corrupt, or if s/he's got a 'left' perspective.

further there's a lot of problem about where an 'anti right' person should stand. with the democrats? since they are confused or timid on many issues, should one 'let that ride' or skewer them (knowing Cheney will gloat of it).

most TV debates, of course, are hopelessly watered, true. but it's also true is that Jon does just joke around and/or give 'softball' questions whenever it suits---which is not a problem in a 'comedic approach.'

---

another issue is where CNN's 'critical' perspectives on some Bush policies come from. amicus and others think of it as 'left.' i think it's a kind of 'populism' or 'small business' orientation which is not incompatible with some varieties of 'right wing' thinking. this point is relevant, since CNN 'debates' are between a Bush Cheney position and the CNN populist position.

to give one example; CNN apparently wants 'tight borders' and lots of deportations, forbidding of issuing ID papers, etc. i have trouble seeing that as 'left' in any way. so a CNN 'debate', or Lou Dobbs questioning about open v. closed borders has little to do with left/right issues. one might even say it's Cheney v Buchanan.

 

[thebullet]

America has reached an all-time low point when to get any real news, one has to watch a comedy show.

The Daily Show is the only show on any American network of which I am aware where one can see actual facts, even though it is filtered through the lens of humor.

You hear and see things on The Daily Show that would never appear on Crossfire or any network news. It's a sad state of affairs in this country when the broadcast and publishing news organizations refuse to deliver news.

PBS's show Now with David Brancaccio covered this very issue the other night along with David McChesney, head of a non-partison media group "Free Press".

The show was fascinating and frightening, although it didn't reveal anything any informed viewer didn't already know.

Want to learn more? Here is a link to NOW. Follow their links to McChesney's writings

 

[Guest]

reading the exchange posted, i don't think carlson was bested.

it's hard to pin down a comedian, esp. when it's unclear if s/he's generally poking fun at politicians and pretentious and corrupt, or if s/he's got a 'left' perspective.

further there's a lot of problem about where an 'anti right' person should stand. with the democrats? since they are confused or timid on many issues, should one 'let that ride' or skewer them (knowing Cheney will gloat of it).

most TV debates, of course, are hopelessly watered, true. but also true is that Jon does just joke around and/or give 'softball' questions whenever it suits---which is not a problem in a 'comedic approach.'

I don't think there was a winner because they didn't really have a debate.

Carlson kept wanting to complain about Stewart's "coddling" of his guests, while Stewart kept attempting to get his point across about Crossfire's ineffective reporting style.

Stewart was, in effect, begging Carlson and Begala to do a better job in reporting the mainstream news to the public without wilting to the political spin masters.

And I think Stewart's point was important. The Daily Show is a comedy show; Stewart makes no apologies for the nonsense that often occurs despite his own very intelligent grasp of politics and current events.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

reading the exchange posted, i don't think carlson was bested. . .

That, of course, is your perrogative.

The majority of commentators took quite the opposite position.

Jon Stewart was brought on the show (as a single rather than half a debating pair) to be their monkey, and promote his book.

Instead, he eschewed talk of his book and used the opportunity to air his opinion that shows like Crossfire were hurting public debate, and journalism as a whole, in America.

Tucker became petulant during the show, and was indignant following the broadcast, but the most damage was done by Tucker himself when he tried to defend Crossfire's lack of substantive content by comparing it to softball questioning of John Kerry on Jon's fake news show.

In any case, when judging effectiveness, perhaps Deep Throat's advice is the most practical: "Follow the money".

Jon Stewart's The Daily Show is now a top-rated show on Comedy Central and neither Tucker Carlson nor Crossfire appear anywhere on CNN.

CNN Will Cancel 'Crossfire' and Cut Ties to Commentator
By BILL CARTER

Published: January 6, 2005

CNN has ended its relationship with the conservative commentator Tucker Carlson and will shortly cancel its long-running daily political discussion program, "Crossfire," the new president of CNN, Jonathan Klein, said last night.

Mr. Carlson said he had actually quit "Crossfire" last April and had agreed to stay on until his contract expired. He said he had a deal in place for a job as the host of a 9 p.m. nightly talk program on MSNBC, CNN's rival.

One NBC News executive said that no deal had been completed between MSNBC and Mr. Carlson. "Tucker is a great journalist and we are exploring options with him for a 9 p.m. job," said Jeremy Gaines, a spokesman for MSNBC.

"I don't know what CNN is saying," Mr. Carlson said. "But I have no dispute with CNN."

Mr. Klein said the decisions to part company with Mr. Carlson and to end "Crossfire" were not specifically related, because he had decided to drop "Crossfire" regardless of whether Mr. Carlson wanted to stay on.

Mr. Klein said, "We just determined there was not a role here in the way Tucker wanted his career to go. He wanted to host a prime-time show in which he would put on live guests and have spirited debate. That's not the kind of show CNN is going to be doing."

Instead, Mr. Klein said, CNN wants to do "roll-up-your-sleeves storytelling," and he said that was not a role he saw for Mr. Carlson. "There are outlets for the kind of show Tucker wants to do and CNN isn't going to be one of them," he said.

Mr. Klein said he wanted to move CNN away from what he called "head-butting debate shows," which have become the staple of much of all-news television in the prime-time hours, especially at the top-rated Fox News Channel.

"CNN is a different animal," Mr. Klein said. "We report the news. Fox talks about the news. They're very good at what they do and we're very good at what we do."

Mr. Klein specifically cited the criticism that the comedian Jon Stewart leveled at "Crossfire" when he was a guest on the program during the presidential campaign. Mr. Stewart said that ranting partisan political shows on cable were "hurting America."

Mr. Klein said last night, "I agree wholeheartedly with Jon Stewart's overall premise." He said he believed that especially after the terror attacks on 9/11, viewers are interested in information, not opinion.

"Crossfire" may be continued "in small doses" as part of the political coverage on CNN's other programs, Mr. Klein said.

Mr. Klein said he intended to keep CNN's highest-rated program, "Larry King Live," much as it is because Mr. King does not do "head-butting debate" but "personality-oriented television."

The rest of CNN's prime-time lineup will be moving toward reporting the day's events and not discussing them, he said.

Mr. Klein said he had no intention of changing that approach, but he added a caveat. "Not unless the first batch of things we're trying to do don't turn out well," he said.

 

[shereads]

America has reached an all-time low point when to get any real news, one has to watch a comedy show.

The Daily Show is the only show on any American network of which I am aware where one can see actual facts, even though it is filtered through the lens of humor.

You hear and see things on The Daily Show that would never appear on Crossfire or any network news. It's a sad state of affairs in this country when the broadcast and publishing news organizations refuse to deliver news.

PBS's show Now with David Brancaccio covered this very issue the other night along with David McChesney, head of a non-partison media group "Free Press".

[threadjack]

This is a good time to nag everyone who mourns the absence of serious broadcast news in America, to please support PBS and/or National Public Radio. Use those annoying fundraising drives they do every year as a reminder to drop an e-mail to your Congressional representatives, in support of public broadcasting. Federal budget cuts will eventually condemn PBS and NPR to extinction or corporate whoredom. No program on commercial television is immune from boycotts and advertiser walk-outs like the ones that doomed Bill Maher's "Politically Incorrect." Eventually, Jon Stewart will insult the wrong industry or its favorite congressional butt-boy, and the show will either go the way of the dodo or dumb itself down by replacing Stewart with some Jay Leno clone/clown.

The biggest share of the blame for the dumbing-down of broadcast news, in my opinion, is not the broadcast and cable networks and their corporate bosses, though. It's the viewing public, but only to an extent; we couldn't have made television news so dumb, so fast, without the invention that single-handedly shortened the attention spans of America: the TV remote.

If we had to walk across the room to change channels, we might be willing to watch a minute or two of news without an explosion or a Runaway Bride update. Now that Tivo and digital cable make it possible to monitor every change of channel, we're doomed to get no more or better news than our TV remotes are willing to sit through.

Whatever did happen to the Runaway Bride?

[/threadjack]

 

[rgraham666]

I blame the education system, shereads.

I don't regard media being as bad as it is and the fact that half the population is illiterate, functionally or actually, as unrelated phenomena.

 

[thebullet]

Rgraham said:

I don't regard media being as bad as it is and the fact that half the population is illiterate, functionally or actually, as unrelated phenomena.

RG, maybe you are refering to Canada.

I was talking to a reporter for a major metropolitan newspaper a few weeks ago. She was fully in agreement that the news has dumbed itself down.

Her two major reasons:

1) investigative reporting costs money that newspapers don't have.
Rather than spend money, they accept single source unsubstantiated information as long as the source is something like "A Source in the White House". In other words, they print the president's propaganda without question and with no editing, because they have to print something and they can't afford to develop news sources on their own.

2) Because the majority of newspaper income comes not from the public but from advertisers, the papers bend over backwards to accomodate their advertisers for fear of losing revenue. If an advertiser objects to a story, the story is dropped or seriously 'cleansed'.

 

[rgraham666]

That's partially true, bullet.

But if the population was literate, they would know when they're being bullshitted and stop paying attention to the bullshitters.

Then the advertisers wouldn't be getting nearly as many eyeballs and would demand that the media shape up.

Or maybe I'm just being that naive Shirley Temple sort again.

 

[Pure]

Virtual, the source you quoted stated,

[from Carter's article about changes at CNN, quoting Klein, CNN president:]

"Crossfire" may be continued "in small doses" as part of the political coverage on CNN's other programs, Mr. Klein said.

Mr. Klein said he intended to keep CNN's highest-rated program, "Larry King Live," much as it is because Mr. King does not do "head-butting debate" but "personality-oriented television."

The rest of CNN's prime-time lineup will be moving toward reporting the day's events and not discussing them, he said.
=====

If I read you right, you're happy that Carlson's debate show was liquidated, and you attribute this in part to Jon's criticisms.

I find it hard to celebrate that CNN will now have simple 'reporting' and not discussing. This implies CNN just broadcasts facts, or will do so.

This homogenization of public discussion and presentation of official facts is, to me, something to be lamented. It's scarey to think of someone reasoning about political choices, presidential candidates, or US foreign policy, based on CNN 'facts.' Not that the CNN debates were anything to write home about, but this is even worse.

Though I personally doubt Jon had much to do with this, I fail to see why you seem to be celebrating.
----

the bullet's counter claim is also unnerving:

The Daily Show is the only show on any American network of which I am aware where one can see actual facts, even though it is filtered through the lens of humor.

I wonder what 'actual facts' the bullet's been seeing lately. Given the satiric intent and content of Jon's show, I'd say 'actual facts' may be rather hard to discern--if indeed there are any such things.

 

[Guest]

That's partially true, bullet.

But if the population was literate, they would know when they're being bullshitted and stop paying attention to the bullshitters.

Then the advertisers wouldn't be getting nearly as many eyeballs and would demand that the media shape up.

Or maybe I'm just being that naive Shirley Temple sort again.

It looks good on ya, baby.

 

[minsue]

it's hard to pin down a comedian, esp. when it's unclear if s/he's generally poking fun at politicians as pretentious and corrupt, or if s/he's got a 'left' perspective.

 

[Guest]

I wonder what 'actual facts' the bullet's been seeing lately. Given the satiric intent and content of Jon's show, I'd say 'actual facts' may be rather hard to discern--if indeed there are any such things.

As a faithful viewer of The Daily Show, I must disagree.

Generally you need a working knowledge of politics to know what in the hell he's talking about half the time on his show. He certainly isn't afraid to stoop to gutter level humor, but then he'll pull out Supreme Court Justice confirmation information and spend twenty minutes discussing those details.

Often Stewart will play a video of an event: a Bush, Cheney, or Rumsfield statement, and then immediately following that he'll play another video of a Bush, Cheney, or Rumsfield statement, one in which they contradict themselves.

And he won't say a word. He doesn't have to. He'll just look at the camera with one of his oh-so-quizzical expressions.

I'm looking forward to tomorrow evening.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

Anyone who has not seen it via a more normal venue, should look for OutFoxed online, at Information Clearing House.

Please Note: The first 60 seconds are a Dutch introduction, the rest is in English, with Dutch subtitles.



Pure,

I am not happy that one can find little real political debate on American network television, but neither do I mourn the loss to news programs which CNN president Jonathan Klein rightly characterized as "head-butting debate shows."

Merely because it calls itself a debate does not automatically insure that a program will make any useful contribution to the viewers’ understanding. Since “head-butting” was the order of the day, mostly heat – and very little light – was ever produced.

Sans “head-butting” Crossfire could have been a decent political debate program, by restricting the debaters to rules of order, instead of permitting them to shout each other down. Unfortunately, while information and opinion might have been exchanged, the result would have been judged to be boring television — not including any verbal WWF — and have to be segregated to the Sunday morning political ghetto.

As for being homogeneous, at that time, CNN was fielding Crossfire and a host of Crossfire clones. Since then, I can think of few Crossfire clones that have survived — but do not credit Jon Stewart with that, because television is always chasing the latest trend, and CNN is no exception.



I am, as a potential viewer, quite happy that the bow-tied little weasel was let go.

Judging by his numbers, I am not in the minority, there.

 

[thebullet]

Sweetsubsarahh said:
Often Stewart will play a video of an event: a Bush, Cheney, or Rumsfield statement, and then immediately following that he'll play another video of a Bush, Cheney, or Rumsfield statement, one in which they contradict themselves.

You are correct, Sarahh, dear. This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about. The mainstream news media allows the administration not only to tell lies; they let them tell bad, easily refutable lies!

Jon Stewart and Co. refudiates the lies with regularity. Since he presents actual clips of the lying motherfuckers without editorial comment, the result is an administration with their pants down on Comedy Central.

Why the hell doesn't ABC or CBS or NBC do the same? They all have access to the same clips. Fox, of course, is leading the charge on behalf of the White House, so you could never expect them to tell any semblance of the truth.